On agricultural frontiers, minimal regulation and potential windfall profits drive opportunistic land use that often results in environmental damage. Cannabis, an increasingly decriminalized agricultural commodity in many places throughout the world, may now be creating new agricultural frontiers. We examined how cannabis frontiers have boomed in northern California, one of the United States' leading production areas. From 2012-2016 cannabis farms increased in number by 58%, cannabis plants increased by 183%, and the total area under cultivation increased by 91%. Growth in number of sites (80%), as well as in site size (56% per site) contributed to the observed expansion. Cannabis expansion took place in areas of high environmental sensitivity, including 80%-116% increases in cultivation sites near high-quality habitat for threatened and endangered salmonid fish species. Production increased by 40% on steep slopes, sites more than doubled near public lands, and increased by 44% in remote locations far from paved roads. Cannabis farm abandonment was modest, and driven primarily by farm size, not location within sensitive environments. To address policy and institutions for environmental protection, we examined state budget allocations for cannabis regulatory programs. These increased six-fold between 2012-2016 but remained very low relative to other regulatory programs. Production may expand on frontiers elsewhere in the world, and our results warn that without careful policy and institutional development these frontiers may pose environmental threats, even in locations with otherwise robust environmental laws and regulatory institutions.
The extent of wildfires in the western United States is increasing, but how land ownership, firefighting, and reserve status influence fire probability is unclear. California serves as a unique natural experiment to estimate the impact of these factors, as ownership is split equally between federal and non-federal landowners; there is a relatively large proportion of reserved lands where extractive uses are prohibited and fire suppression is limited; and land ownership and firefighting responsibility are purposefully not always aligned. Panel Poisson regression techniques and pre-regression matching were used to model changes in annual fire probability from 1950-2015 on reserve and non-reserve lands on federal and non-federal ownerships across four vegetation types: forests, rangelands, shrublands, and forests without commercial species. Fire probability was found to have increased over time across all 32 categories. A marginal effects analysis showed that federal ownership and firefighting was associated with increased fire probability, and that the difference in fire probability on federal versus non-federal lands is increasing over time. Ownership, firefighting, and reserve status, played roughly equal roles in determining fire probability, and were found to have much greater influence than average maximum temperature ( • C) during summer months (June, July, August), average annual precipitation (cm), and average annual topsoil moisture content by volume, demonstrating the critical role these factors play in western fire regimes and the importance of including them in future analysis focused on understanding and predicting wildfire in the Western United States.
Warming in the Arctic is occurring at twice the rate of the global average, resulting in permafrost thaw and a restructuring of the Arctic hydrologic cycle as indicated by increased stream discharge during low-flow periods. In these cold regions, permafrost thaw is postulated to increase low-flow discharge, or baseflow, through either:
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.